Torts: Cases and Materials

by Aaron D. Twerski, James A. Henderson Jr.

Torts: Cases and Materials, Fourth Edition is a casebook that engages students without avoiding the hard questions. Modeled on the venerable Prosser casebook, but intended to be modern, accessible, and yet sophisticated, this book consistently gets high marks from students for being clear, user-friendly, and not hiding-the-ball like so many other casebooks. Challenging hypotheticals and authors' dialogues engage students while allowing instructors to probe more deeply into ambiguous or developing areas of law. The book's manageable length makes it an ideal for a three- to four-hour introductory Torts course.

Genres: Law

985 pages, Hardcover

Published December 2, 2011

Reviews

[Sophie Nye · Rating 3 out of 5]

Read for Torts. It's a pretty traditional casebook. I remember not loving that there would be a bunch of hypos that would have zero explanation at all (I get that some concepts don't have a discrete answer, but it would have been nice if they offered an explanation of that).

[Bryan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Bea is driving a manual transmission car (for which she has no license, in violation of a state statute) when she loses control and crashes into a fire hydrant. The broken hydrant spews water all over the street, causing Charlie to lose control of his car and crash into an electricity pole. The pole knocks out electricity on the entire block. Dee is walking in a stairwell in an apartment building on that block when the lights go out, causing her to fall down the stairs and break her leg.

Discuss the rights and liabilities of all the parties.

[Pengyu Jiang · Rating 4 out of 5]

This book tells you frankly what the law of torts is. But it is designed to work with Prof Twerski's classes. In the classes, Prof Twerski will tell you why the cases are there in the book and his criticisms of them. With his comments in the classes, you can see a system of torts law. He has a lot of criticisms about the cases, but his way of saying it is "I don't understand why the court did this when it could do that" rather than "This court is wrong and should do that," so I've learned a very polite way of criticizing people :)